![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 26. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by cadett on January 9, 2014, at 20:22:51
Anyone out there still taking minocycline?
Posted by SLS on January 9, 2014, at 23:36:01
In reply to minocycline, posted by cadett on January 9, 2014, at 20:22:51
Hi.
I have been taking minocycline 200 mg/day for about 1 1/2 years. A rather strong antidepressant effect emerged during the first week. Some people feel uncomfortably stimulated at first. However, this seems to be transient and disappears quickly. I have bipolar disorder: chronic depression with drug-induced mania.
How did you become interested in minocycline. Are you taking any other drugs?
- Scott
Posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 4:48:22
In reply to minocycline, posted by cadett on January 9, 2014, at 20:22:51
Just curious. Why are folks singling out minocycline as the antibiotic to take? There are lots of choices. Why that one?
It is a good one, potent, can penetrate intracellular bugs, but in my experience could easily scare someone away in a short time. Unless someone knows about the possibility of hidden infection, what a Herx is, what a Herx feels like, the length of time required, and such, if this drug is helpful for depression patients then I think it would be extremely helpful for them to be very aware of the bacterial angle involved here, not just the psychiatric anti-inflammation angle.
It is my opinion that mino helps psych patients....if it actually does...by two mechanisms. First, it can lower the populations of offending bacteria, with lyme being the most likely in my opinion, far more common than anyone has a clue, and this will in turn lower the exotoxins and endotoxins the bugs secrete. Those toxins bind to our neurotransmitter receptors and that's where our symptoms come from. Secondly, all the tetracycline family of antibiotics have good anti-inflammation properties, even at sub-therapeutic bacterial doses. Even small doses help in this regard. Inflammation in the brain would obviously have the potential to cause all sorts of psych symptoms.
Anyway, since I have had a ton of experience with a wide variety of antibiotics, I am curious as to why psych patients at this board have singled out minocycline. It could actually be too potent for a lot of folks unless they know what they are dealing with. The outcome of that would be a premature end to the trial, and the loss of opportunity for any benefit.
For mino to be of any use in psychiatry, requires months or years. We are not talking days or weeks. If that is your time frame, forget it.
Posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 6:06:45
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 4:48:22
> Just curious. Why are folks singling out minocycline as the antibiotic to take? There are lots of choices. Why that one?
I thought that you were taking minocycline and that it was working. Did you stop taking it?
You really ought to do the research yourself. Perhaps, then, you can be convinced to disseminate scientifically derived information.
I have written quite a bit about minocycline and how it differs from the other tetracyclines. Pubmed and Google will provide you with more information. This drug really needs to be studied in order to appreciate its potential.
This is a short list:
http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl?init=/babble/20120803/msgs/1023257.html
Check this out:
Molecules are three-dimensional. There are multitudinous sites on a molecule that can act as ligand substrates for different biological receptors. With minocycline, there are a bunch of them that are unrelated to antibiotic action. Apparently some of them are capable of producing positive changes in the trajectories of major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia.
- Scott
Posted by Emme_V2 on January 10, 2014, at 6:30:39
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 4:48:22
> Just curious. Why are folks singling out minocycline as the antibiotic to take? There are lots of choices. Why that one?
The nationally-recognized psychopharmacologist who suggested I try minocycline did so because of its action on the glutamate system - totally unrelated to its antibiotic properties. I am NOT taking minocycline as an antibiotic. I take it as a psychotropic medication, and it is a very effective one for me.A 2004 article by Pae et al. (do a search on Pubmed) describes all the different ways in which minocycline could have antidepressant effect - unrelated to its antibiotic properties. This is an interesting drug.
Posted by cadett on January 10, 2014, at 8:35:01
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by SLS on January 9, 2014, at 23:36:01
I became interested from reading on here and other studies on the internet.
Cymbalta,Metiformin and Temzepam for sleep.Also Xanax PRN. Added 200mg of Minocycline about a week ago.
Posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 8:45:58
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by cadett on January 10, 2014, at 8:35:01
> I became interested from reading on here and other studies on the internet.
> Cymbalta,Metiformin and Temzepam for sleep.Also Xanax PRN. Added 200mg of Minocycline about a week ago.Apparently, minocycline works well in combination with other psychotropics. If I were in your position, I would keep taking the minocycline while you trial other drugs should it not produce an improvement with what you are currently taking. I have seen minocycline work well in combination with Abilify and Lamictal. Minocycline should be taken twice a day. I don't know for sure, but it may be that minocycline and Lamictal work synergistically to reduce glutamate hyperactivity.
Good luck!
Is the metformin for pre-existing diabetes, or to reduce drug-induced weight gain? I am thinking of using it to combat the weight-gain that Abilify has produced. Are you experiencing any side effects from the metformin?
- Scott
Posted by cadett on January 10, 2014, at 8:55:27
In reply to Re: minocycline » cadett, posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 8:45:58
Thank you Scott.
Yes the Metiformin is for weight gain. I gain 30lbs. while on a lithium trail in a month.
Posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 9:11:47
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 6:06:45
Thanks Scott. I appreciate the info.
Your posts directed at me have a tone of antagonism or confrontation. Is that intended, accidental, or just one of those misinterpretations that happens when only words on a page can be seen without body language accompanying it?
Just curious. You are a science guy. I am a realville guy. I do not ever try or intend to antagonize your views on things. But I sense antagonism directed toward me. Just wanted to know if that is true or am I imagining things that aren't there?
I am a psych patient after all.
I don't recall ever saying I've taken mino in that last 3 years so I have no idea where you got that idea.
I take Azithromycin, Cefdinir, and Plaguenil, with spotty pulsed doses of Flagyl here and there.
I made a lot of progress with doxy but it reached a plateau and began to relapse. Mino earlier in my journeys was just too strong and kicked me out of the game with massive Herx's. In that class, Tetracycline is the one in the real world that does not show the same pattern of plateau and relapse that the others do.
I wish more of this "outside the box" type thinking would enter the psychiatric world. It is this sort of stuff where I believe true deep long lasting mood improvement will happen.
The science studies help point us in the right direction, such as mino instead of doxy or tetra, but that is nothing more than a starting line. It could very well be that despite a study that showed mino more effective than tetra in depression, the guy sitting next to you will do great with neither of them but doxy instead. Ya know? It just aint as simple as science tries to make it look. There is no nice neat compartmentalized box. Americans try to squeeze things into black and white. No gray allowed. It's either Addisons' or Cushings, but nothing inbetween. It's either Celiac or not, no such thing as gluten sensitivity. It's either depression or bipolar (poor example but you know what I mean).
As far as "disseminating" data gathered scientifically, that's not a problem. The actual mechanics of how and why they gathered that data, is a problem. Studies look great in Abstracts. Start digging into fine details and there are all sorts of flaws. Not universally, but commonly.
How about the incident last year when those global warming scientists with all their peer reviewed stuff, got caught when it was discovered that all their data was completely forged. The most prominent voices in global warming were proved fakes in their own emails. It was all a hoax made to look like science.
If you want, might be a fun experiment, send me a study of your choice....the whole thing, not just the abstract....authors, who funded it, purpose of the study, how the subjects were selected, the actual mechanics of dosing, how the study was used after publishing, political affiliation of the author(s), economic affiliation, if any, with a potential conflict of interest, details details details. And hopefully it doesn't have in it the common words "may", "could", "suggests". That's just not science. That's editorial. I have other stuff I want to be do, so I'm actually hoping you don't send me one! :-) But if you do, I can probably find some flaws in it that make the whole thing questionable. If not, it's a good study, because I am critical and picky. I ask questions others won't dare ask.
> > Just curious. Why are folks singling out minocycline as the antibiotic to take? There are lots of choices. Why that one?
>
> I thought that you were taking minocycline and that it was working. Did you stop taking it?
>
> You really ought to do the research yourself. Perhaps, then, you can be convinced to disseminate scientifically derived information.
>
> I have written quite a bit about minocycline and how it differs from the other tetracyclines. Pubmed and Google will provide you with more information. This drug really needs to be studied in order to appreciate its potential.
>
> This is a short list:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl?init=/babble/20120803/msgs/1023257.html
>
> Check this out:
>
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&ved=0CFsQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.medicinabiomolecular.com.br%2Fbiblioteca%2Fpdfs%2FCasos-Clinicos%2Fcc-0471.pdf&ei=-N3PUpCJPKLisASHu4LQDA&usg=AFQjCNGEJDCalzac6pLFs5Yr6aSJ_ZOPEg&bvm=bv.59026428,d.cWc&cad=rja
>
> Molecules are three-dimensional. There are multitudinous sites on a molecule that can act as ligand substrates for different biological receptors. With minocycline, there are a bunch of them that are unrelated to antibiotic action. Apparently some of them are capable of producing positive changes in the trajectories of major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Phillipa on January 10, 2014, at 9:13:32
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by cadett on January 10, 2014, at 8:55:27
I was very briefly on it for peri oral dermatitis the dizziness at 75mg made it one the dermatologist said to discontinue and gave me topical antibiotic lotions which eliminated the problem. So looks like bipolar, schizophrenia, Major Depression are the only conditions it works for. I know it's next to impossible to get an antibiotic for anything due to antibiotic resistance allowing super bugs. Phillipa
Posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 9:16:19
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by Emme_V2 on January 10, 2014, at 6:30:39
Emme that's awesome! Glad to hear it. I am obviously not the expert on minocycline in particular but I am happy to hear of the things about it that I did not know. The glutamate angle, I did not know that. Your response to the drug....awesome! Love it.
Thanks for sharing. If I ever go back to revisit the tetracyclines, I might just give that one another try. I was so infected when I first tried Mino, it was like a nuclear bomb to me, massive Herxheimer reactions, terrifying. I believe I could probably handle it now without much problem in the Herx department.> > Just curious. Why are folks singling out minocycline as the antibiotic to take? There are lots of choices. Why that one?
>
>
> The nationally-recognized psychopharmacologist who suggested I try minocycline did so because of its action on the glutamate system - totally unrelated to its antibiotic properties. I am NOT taking minocycline as an antibiotic. I take it as a psychotropic medication, and it is a very effective one for me.
>
> A 2004 article by Pae et al. (do a search on Pubmed) describes all the different ways in which minocycline could have antidepressant effect - unrelated to its antibiotic properties. This is an interesting drug.
>
>
Posted by Emme_V2 on January 10, 2014, at 18:33:38
In reply to Re: minocycline » Emme_V2, posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 9:16:19
> Emme that's awesome! Glad to hear it.
Thanks! I was pretty amazed at the success - there really isn't a lot of clinical experience with this drug for psychiatric indications, although there are several trials for different disorders. But my pdoc was open to giving it a try, and we hit pay dirt. After some startup stimulation, which subsided, it feels like a very clean antidepressant for me.
> I am obviously not the expert on minocycline in particular but I am happy to hear of the things about it that I did not know. The glutamate angle, I did not know that. Your response to the drug....awesome! Love it.Yeah, me too. :) If I were a pharmaceutical company, I'd be trying to figure if it's possible to separate out the antibiotic properties of this drug from the other capabilities it has and formulate a new drug.
> Thanks for sharing. If I ever go back to revisit the tetracyclines, I might just give that one another try. I was so infected when I first tried Mino, it was like a nuclear bomb to me, massive Herxheimer reactions, terrifying. I believe I could probably handle it now without much problem in the Herx department.
Yeah, if you've got Lyme on board, I imagine it's a bit of a different ball game in terms of how to dose and what you can tolerate. I've known a couple of people who have taken mino for Lyme, and they had to feel their way with it.
>
> > > Just curious. Why are folks singling out minocycline as the antibiotic to take? There are lots of choices. Why that one?
> >
> >
> > The nationally-recognized psychopharmacologist who suggested I try minocycline did so because of its action on the glutamate system - totally unrelated to its antibiotic properties. I am NOT taking minocycline as an antibiotic. I take it as a psychotropic medication, and it is a very effective one for me.
> >
> > A 2004 article by Pae et al. (do a search on Pubmed) describes all the different ways in which minocycline could have antidepressant effect - unrelated to its antibiotic properties. This is an interesting drug.
> >
> >
>
>
Posted by Phillipa on January 10, 2014, at 20:59:55
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 9:11:47
Cushings disease and Addison's disease are totally opposite. One you take cortisone for the other you don't. I know my Mother died from Addison's as too much cortisone shut down her adrenal glands. Cushings google it. Phillipa
Posted by Phillipa on January 10, 2014, at 21:04:09
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by Phillipa on January 10, 2014, at 20:59:55
http://voices.yahoo.com/adrenal-dysfunction-addisons-disease-cushings-558210.html?cat=70
Posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 23:31:50
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by bleauberry on January 10, 2014, at 9:11:47
You do indeed detect some agitation on my part.
> You are a science guy. I am a realville guy.
What does that mean?
Is science not real? Your realville guessing is better than science experiments?
I am confronting your words aggressively. I don't feel that they reflect "realville" at all, and you have not provided people with anything but a leap of faith that what you say is the truth. You do a good job of representing your guesses and personal theories as fact. No good. Let's see some evidence for the things you so confidently declare.
I am uncomfortable with your statements going unchallenged. I haven't yet figured out how to challenge your words without challenging you.
Would it be accurate to say that you attribute some mental illnesses to the activity of microbes? If so, which ones? Which illnesses are not due to microbes?
I hope you use the resources of the WWW to demonstrate the veracity of your contentions.
Let's go one step at a time.
Please identify the toxins that you say are responsible for mood illness (MDD; BD)?
- Scott
Posted by bleauberry on January 11, 2014, at 7:31:12
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by Phillipa on January 10, 2014, at 20:59:55
Thank you for that Phillipa. I am aware of that. My point was missed . That's ok. If you get a chance sometime, maybe go back and read it again. I wasn't meaning to talk about either of those diseases, but rather wanted to demonstrate there are gray areas in medicine that do not fit neatly in a box. For example, adrenal fatigue which is serious but is not cushings is not addisons and is not generally recognized as a bonafide condition. The heart can be weak, but not the adrenals! (kidding, just trying to make a point). If the heart was treated in the same manner as adrenal glands, then the heart surgeon would not care if you have a diseased heart or not, only that it is beating. White is on, life, black is off, dead, but no gray inbetween. That is how medicine views a lot of stuff. I don't know why. Confuses me because it is not consistent.
> Cushings disease and Addison's disease are totally opposite. One you take cortisone for the other you don't. I know my Mother died from Addison's as too much cortisone shut down her adrenal glands. Cushings google it. Phillipa
Posted by bleauberry on January 11, 2014, at 8:20:24
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 23:31:50
Scott if we can have an adult conversation with respect, cool.
You admitted aggressiveness and antagonism.
I am sorry but I do not purposely subject myself to the torture of being attacked by someone else because they think different than me and they think they are the only ones correct and I'm not and they are the only ones that can help people I can't and anything I say is going to hurt people but everything you say is going to help people.I don't need that.
Keep in mind, I could do that with you and never would.
Respect, sir, goes a long way.
I can have really deep heavy duty debates with people in my own life on whatever...politics, meds, economics, news, whatever....and come out of with smiles and respect for each other.
I don't see that sort of partner in this discussion, I don't like pain.
So I would suggest one of two things:
1. Have a polite respectful discussion of differences, or
2. Ignore my posts. They might not be helpful to you, but based on the babblemails I get over the years, others have found my writings life changing and very helpful.If I could just save one person, help one person, I would feel so satisfied with my time here. Just one. I gotta tell ya. The feedback I have gotten over the years. It has been a whole lot more than one, and I like that. Suffering was ended. Unfortunately, it was not science that worked. It was simple pure human intuition guided by experience. Which does not jive well with scientific oriented thinking.
But none of that is an excuse for disrespect, antagonism, or belittling someone else's ideas via abrasive interrogation.
Ok, thought I was done, glanced at your questions, and figured what the heck, go ahead and answer them. The fool that I am. Fall in the trap set for me. Here goes.
> You do indeed detect some agitation on my part.
There is no place for that here Scott. I hope you can shake it. Lots of people have wildly differing views and approaches.>
> > You are a science guy. I am a realville guy.
>
> What does that mean?
It means if you have a question on something, the first place you turn for an answer is a scientific journal. The first place I turn to is google. I want that same science. But that's only a piece of it. I want to know what everyone at the forum who actually has experience in the topic, how did it work for them, what were their outcomes and comments? And the other forum. And the other one. And that doctor's blog. And that other doctor's blog. And that article from the local news. And the NP, the MD, everyone in my own circles, what do they know on the topic, I want to know the pro side but I also want to know the con side. I am not much interested in what happened in the lab, I am very interested in what happened with actual people in real life outside of the lab setting. That's where the rubber hits the road. That's the place I call Real-Ville.
I slam science a lot because in my observations they have drifted from what real science is. Science is facts. Anything less is not science. Call it research, hypothesis, whatever, but it is not science until it is fact, proven beyond .0000001 percent accuracy, repeatable every time. What we see today are more along the lines of science editorials based on incomplete, unremarkable, or contradictory data, which is usually cherry picked by either side to make their case. I've done that a lot just for fund and it's a good brain excercise. It is not hard to dispute or discredit a great many science studies when looking at the fine details of that study. Some people trust establishment, whatever they say, whatever they conclude, no suspicion of the data or mechanism or anything, no questions asked. I am not one of those. Realville is....what really happens on the street versus the lab. Today's science, sorry to say, is not real.Repeat, to answer your question, today's science IS NOT REAL.
Disclaimer....my opinion only. But, gotta admit, they deserve huge applause for effort. It's just too complicated, I think human ego gets in the way sometimes. Nothing new. And don't misunderstand a blanket statement like that....there are always good ones doing the right thing....my opinions are of established science in general, does not include all scientists or all studies. Some of them truly are unbiased, well constructed, and interpreted in accurate ways, or preferably so dang accurate that it turns out to be fact rather than interpretation.
>
> Is science not real? Your realville guessing is better than science experiments?
I don't think either is better. I think what is better is to combine both of them into a hybrid. It's all so complicated, we need all the tools and options we can get.
>
> I am confronting your words aggressively. I don't feel that they reflect "realville" at all, and you have not provided people with anything but a leap of faith that what you say is the truth.I never accept what someone else says as truth without first verifying it myself. It would be very easy for anyone to type in a google search box to look deeper into whatever I said. And if they did that, confirmation and verification is there. If I question what someone says, I don't go attack them. Instead, I go to look for the answer myself to see if what they said had merit or not. Maybe my mistake is I assume everybody operates their own lives with that same sense of curiosity, but maybe not?
So for anyone out there reading this, do not accept what SLS has to say at face value. Do not accept what I say at face value. It is not hard to take a look yourself and decide for yourself what is best for you.
>You do a good job of representing your guesses and personal theories as fact. No good. Let's see some evidence for the things you so confidently declare.
NO. Just ignore the whole thing if it bothers you that much. Or go find the answers yourself. You can find them in the exact same places I did. Why do I have to do it for YOU? Who are you? I am not a salesman and I am not on defense. I offer ideas, someone else can look into it and make their own decisions as to whether I am a cook or pretty smart. Their decision. I've been both.
>
> I am uncomfortable with your statements going unchallenged. I haven't yet figured out how to challenge your words without challenging you.
I am not comfortable with yours. But who am I to judge you? Not my place.
Why can you not research my words yourself? Isn't that the point? That we all gather as much wisdom as we can? You want someone else to do it for you? That's fine. Just won't be me, that's all. Nothing I talk about is hard to research. Besides, anybody....anybody...taking advice from SLS or Blue or XYZ without any looking into themselves, well, that just is not smart in my book.>
> Would it be accurate to say that you attribute some mental illnesses to the activity of microbes? If so, which ones? Which illnesses are not due to microbes?
Absolutely! Wow. Bartonella, in my experience, causes more profound psychiatric symptoms than do borellia or babesia. Mycoplasma devastating. Parasites of various kinds. When their poop, pee, excretions, defensive enzymes, and such, hit the neurotransmitter receptors, or join with a serotonin molecule to corrupt it, psychiatric symptoms of all kinds happen.Tons of peer reviewed stuff on this topic if you haven't seen it already.
>
> I hope you use the resources of the WWW to demonstrate the veracity of your contentions.
I don't even know what veracity means. I use www a ton, Library of Sciences a ton. I hope you use the resources of clinical settings, forums, and blogs to demonstrate the veracity (whatever that is) of your contentions. You don't just rely on white coats and your own medical team, do you?>
> Let's go one step at a time.
>
> Please identify the toxins that you say are responsible for mood illness (MDD; BD)?
Shoemaker. Harrowitz. Burrascano. Study them. After you have done that, I guarantee you, you being the science guy not me, YOU will be able to describe this stuff better than me! And you will have a decent list of the actual chemical names of the toxins. The one I am aware of that I use cholestryramine for is quinolic acid. But there are so many and science is lagging because we don't even have any economical way to test for these things in a clinical setting, only in a lab setting. The research is there for anyone interested. You seem interested.>
>
> - Scott
Posted by SLS on January 11, 2014, at 10:23:27
In reply to Re: minocycline » SLS, posted by bleauberry on January 11, 2014, at 8:20:24
> Scott if we can have an adult conversation with respect, cool.
It doesn't have to be a conversation of any kind. I won't delineate the reasons why I find your posts so infuriating to me, but they are. So far you haven't answered a single question of mine directly and with the providing of citations.
I, too, would like people to be properly informed and safe.
It is what it is. If you don't want me to confront your words and disprove your contentions, then don't post at all or simply ignore my replies. I really don't care.
> You admitted aggressiveness and antagonism.
I admitted being aggressive, but I do not recall my saying that I went out of my way to antagonize you.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20140104/msgs/1058241.html
> I am sorry but I do not purposely subject myself to the torture of being attacked by someone else because they think different than me
I am certainly attacking your words and the ideas they represent. If I wanted to attack you, I would find myself in world of incivility.
You claim certainty where there is none. I am not comfortable leaving this certainty unchallenged.
> Repeat, to answer your question, today's science IS NOT REAL.
It is precisely this posture of yours that demands of me that you be challenged aggressively. If you don't like it, then ignore my posts. I have no intention of ignoring yours. It is too bad that you have felt progressively more and more interrogated by me. You never give me a straigh answer with any of the details that would bolster your claims made to the community. You don't like being interrogated, and I don't like being lectured to as if I were a child.
It ain't easy, but I try hard to know the difference between what I know and what I don't know. It is unacceptable to me to use my feeble mind to theorize, guess, and develop emotional attachments to my own ideas and present them as fact.
Is there any single question that you would like to ask me regarding minocycline?
- Scott
Posted by johnLA on January 11, 2014, at 18:43:50
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by SLS on January 11, 2014, at 10:23:27
i'd like to ask a question or two to you scott;
that maybe, just maybe, YOU are on the wrong path to getting well?
you have been ill for decades. looking to psychiatry for answers. i'm not attacking you. but, wondering if you got away from the 'science' of psychiatry and try another approach you might get where you want to?
'a man see's only what he wants to see and disregard's the rest.'
john
Posted by SLS on January 11, 2014, at 19:50:48
In reply to Re: minocycline » SLS, posted by johnLA on January 11, 2014, at 18:43:50
> i'd like to ask a question or two to you scott;
>
> that maybe, just maybe, YOU are on the wrong path to getting well?
>
> you have been ill for decades. looking to psychiatry for answers. i'm not attacking you. but, wondering if you got away from the 'science' of psychiatry and try another approach you might get where you want to?
>
> 'a man see's only what he wants to see and disregard's the rest.'
>
> john
>
>
Thanks, John. I am doing very much better for having tweaked my dosage of Parnate. I have been improved for two years. I want more, though, and I want it quicker. I am still looking for an adjunct treatment to bring me all the way to remission. I am looking at two APs and deep rTMS.You really don't know my history, of course, but I have tried a bunch of things that lie outside the purview of mainstream psychiatry. The food allergy rotation diet was a real pain in the butt. Do you remember Stuart M. Berger? His food allergy stuff was very popular in the 1980s. Herbs, chiropractic, exercise, hypoglycemia, thyroid (Wilson's), vitamins and other supplements, antimicrobials, etc.
I would say that I am 40-45% improved, and the trend is towards further improvement. I haven't hit a plateau yet, although it is something I worry about. I will have a few "off" days in a row, followed by a surge of improvement. My doctors at the NIH observed that this was common for people with severe TRD. Robert Post likened the pattern of improvement to saw-teeth. Up, down, up more, down less, up more even more, etc. This is in contrast to a staircase pattern where there is no true worsening of depression along the way.
Anyway, thanks again. It is good that you prompted me to give an update and a brief accounting of my attempts to treat my illness using alternative methods.
How are you doing?
- Scott
Posted by johnLA on January 11, 2014, at 20:03:04
In reply to Re: minocycline » johnLA, posted by SLS on January 11, 2014, at 19:50:48
thanks for the response scott.
i was probably 'reading' too much into your comments. i thought maybe you were getting manic or something.
good to hear you are on the path you know is best for you.
as for me i am not well. i am very sensitive to meds and just can't seem to find something. initially i gave meds a good try. now, not so much. i'm on a very low dose of remeron for sleep and 2 to 3mg of klonopin. i'm slowly trying to reduce the klonopin.
i have been thinking of ect again, multiple ketamine infusions, or just wait and pray.
for me anhedonia, no job, and ruminating bad thoughts are the course. i do a bit better at night.
sorry if i got after you a bit on my post before.
john
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 17, 2014, at 0:25:37
In reply to Re: minocycline » bleauberry, posted by SLS on January 10, 2014, at 23:31:50
> I am confronting your words aggressively.
>
> I am uncomfortable with your statements going unchallenged. I haven't yet figured out how to challenge your words without challenging you.Is bleau the new Lou? I'd suggest:
a. focus on supporting the poster asking for help
b. counter (what you see as) personal theories with (what you see as) facts
c. be civilFollow-ups regarding this should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. Thanks,
Bob
Posted by SLS on January 17, 2014, at 6:21:01
In reply to Re: confronting words aggressively » SLS, posted by Dr. Bob on January 17, 2014, at 0:25:37
I apologized to Bleauberry already off-board. I was wrong in the way that I attacked him.
- Scott
Posted by Darwin on January 17, 2014, at 13:30:32
In reply to minocycline, posted by cadett on January 9, 2014, at 20:22:51
I'm interested in minocycline, but I worry about it killing the good bacteria that inhabit the gut. Is this a problem?
Posted by cadett on January 17, 2014, at 13:49:26
In reply to Re: minocycline, posted by Darwin on January 17, 2014, at 13:30:32
That was concern of mine also. I have been taking a probiotic some and eating yogurt. I am only 2 weeks in on the trail, so far so good.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.